Arahatta1 (nt.) [abstr. formation fr. arahat˚, 2nd base of arahant in compn.: see arahant iv.2] the state or condition of an Arahant, i. e. perfection in the Buddhist sense = Nibbāna (S iv.151) final & absolute emancipation, Arahantship, the attainment of the last & highest stage of the Path (see magga & anāgāmin). This is not restricted by age or sex or calling. There is one instance in the Canon of a child

Now it is needed to prove the qualities of both. Thanks!!

*Dzogchen on a hint edit into Dzogchenpa

Last edited by Hanzze on Wed Nov 24, 2010 2:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hanzze, most definitely dzogchen falls outside of the realm of the Thera's teachings, lineage, view and practice.We could as easily ask how to "translate" Haitian Voodoo into Pali.The Theravada has seen some strains of mahayana sutra teachings, but has never taught or practiced dzogchen (in any language.)

Yontan wrote:Hanzze, most definitely dzogchen falls outside of the realm of the Thera's teachings, lineage, view and practice.We could as easily ask how to "translate" Haitian Voodoo into Pali.

I guess Haitian Voodoo would be difficult as Haiti was not known i guess, but voodoo was used for sure there is an other word for in pali. So you could translate it to: "Ill-will magic used by people of a faraway island"

I did not ask for a compromise or some love between cat and dog, I just what do know the qualities of a Dzogchen. It will not minimize your disagreement, so it is not about taking away your toys

Yontan wrote:The Theravada has seen some strains of mahayana sutra teachings, but has never taught or practiced dzogchen (in any language.)

I don't think so, to be honest. Had you read the book or friend had posted here?

I may have misunderstood what you were asking. I'm not sure.I'm sure the Pali language can accomodate dzogchen teaching if that's what you mean. It sounded like you were looking for dzogchen thoughts/teachings within the Thera canon.I did read the book. It's quite lovely and a good example of two different traditions sharing Dharma to help people with various karmas. Tsoknyi Rinpoche's intro makes it clear that they are teaching different things. Mainly dzogchen does not rely on concepts and purification of karmas and kleshas, which is the bulk of the Theras' perspective. I didn't find anything particularly "dzogchenish" about Ajahn Chah's teaching, though there could certainly be some comparisons made with yogacara and he seems to have a good grasp of prajnaparamita. This is evidence that the mahayana thought has taken root in the Theravada, one big reason not to conflate them with "hinayana" proper. (I'm not in any position to judge another, mind you, but that's my read.)

Dzogchen is the pith of the Nyingma teachings. It relies on direct introduction to the ground of being, before any names of "samsara" and "nirvana," so there is nothing to purify or transform. It isn't a person, or a thing, or a state. In name it is nothing more than a designation of the truth that things have never moved beyond there natural mode of liberation, despite our lack of recognizing that. When Buddha says to Shariputra that there is no form, feeling, etc., he is pointing out that these phenomenal arisings as grasped entities of substantial existence have never for a moment been anything whatsoever beyond a mental imputation. When we clear away these adventitious clouds of "really existants" we have the opportunity to directly perceive the kayas and wisdoms of what we delude beings call "buddha nature" which is in fact simply the smelting away of impurities from our own intrinsic awareness. There's nothing to change. There's nothing to transmute. There's nothing to clear away even.

But if we are not able to connect with this timeless and natural base/ground of our own being, through the direct introduction and cultivation of familiarity via a lineage-holding master, then it's nothing more than sophistry to say "all is completely perfect from the moment of arising." Still we have body aches, bills to pay, hopes of becoming great, loved ones to lose in death, etc.

Dzogchen is the super-relaxed, utterly complete acceptance of the totality of arising/abiding/falling of all things within the state of confusion, pervaded by a deep and direct recognition that this very confusion is the mis-take of luminous free arising of all-things-possible as the fundamental energetic electricity of being. Any notion of "sentient beings" is but a slogging down of the vibrancy of the mandala of the timeless divine. Without "sentient beings' there is no cause for someone to utter "buddha."

Bite a jalapeno and think about what I'm trying to say. It might make up for my lack of skill.

the same is for Arahant (at least) but I would like to translate it into theravadic, or let me say just in simple words. So on its roots. I understand your interpretation, but it is high above and I try to bring it down. Thanks again for your patient! you are, dont make your self a worm!

"Tibetans" always need the feeling that theirs is something special and non-comparable to that of others and even "better", "more direct" or "faster" than that of others. Every tibetan sect has their way of "proving" that theirs is more supreme than any other.This attitude may even be amplified when coming in touch with the western competitive elite thinking.